I'm 99% sure this has been suggested before and it would be nice to get the suggestions all in one place. But I don't want to lose those last couple posts by you, so if I start merging things, I'll be sure to link to them or otherwise give credit where it is due. Anyone who wants to post some links to similar suggestions would save me time and energy.

Well I won't look for other threads tonight, but I'll look around with the search tool maybe tomorrow and see if I can find any other threads. It's also possible that they have points I didn't think of. Does my second post make sense to you agentcom, and if yes, do you agree with my ordering?

Here are some of the links I've found:First, a variety of threads that agree with some point I've made, or propose some portion of what I've suggested:This thread just mentions in passing that foggier fog might be good.

This thread specifically mentions the one thing I think fog doesn't mention in the log, but should-- naming what territory you lost when you get attacked. Especially in large games, even with snapshots it can be hard to tell who actually took what spots, and in what order. That could be really useful.

This thread mentions the same issue with knowing who attacked you where. It also proposes that partial attacks/unsuccessful attacks should be noted somehow. I imagine the second part would be a coding nightmare.

This thread doesn't really go far enough in eliminating information; it proposes that the chart listing territories be removed, but then says that information should still be available in the log. I'm trying to make sources of information more, not less, consistent with each other.

Second, some threads that go the other direction and want fog to be less restrictive than it already is(n't):This thread has two proposals: First it proposes to raise fog vision to two, instead of one. This would be really problematic on loads of maps, notably anywhere there are docks or terits that can attack/see a ton of other territories. For example, in King's court, taking the Field Marshal would allow you to see almost the entire map, since it sees the King and the King sees all castles, as well as the Field Marshal attacks archers, which EACH have a sight range of two terits. Also, taking any dock on any of the AoR maps (or any number of maps with docks) would give you a ton of information. Second, it proposes that armies larger than some number be visible from anywhere on the map (on the principle that you would notice 1000 troops even from across the map). This idea makes sense for battle maps (Waterloo, possibly even the feudal maps, etc), but would be totally nonsensical on two of the most common maps, World and World 2.1

This thread is meant to suggest a fog where you can see all the troop counts, but not the owner. It devolves into people throwing out various fog ideas (which incidentally makes it a more interesting read than the threads that stay on topic). Consensus moves the opposite way, towards providing knowledge of who owns what, but not how many troops they have, which actually seems strikingly logical.

Third, some threads that have fog-related things, that I figured I'd post for reference:This thread is slightly different, but I figured I'd post it-- it's proposing more detailed information after the fog is lifted. It seems like it would require a ton of coding and really seems like more of a job for a plug-in than for CC to be worried about.

This thread proposes that there be a period of time that everyone can just poke their head into the game and see the starting layout before anyone does any conquering (I have experienced going last in an 8 player game and only having 2 terits left, and being clueless as to who is where, so I can relate). This would have the upside of promoting fairness for less intensely active players, but at the cost of adding a day to the start of a game. Potential downside: confusing people who don't understand why they have to click a review button and not take a turn. Potential upside: if you made missing the confirm button count towards a three-turn deadbeat, it could actually save time in games with more than one deadbeat.

Great job Sirgemaine. Makes my job quite a bit easier. Am I the only person who's surprised that this idea hasn't really been fleshed out anywhere else? I did a quick search and also couldn't find it. (Though I searched for "fog" and "fog of war" and didn't get any results!! Something is broken there.)

STICKY! Again, I apologize that the sticky list is growing a little too fast for my (and I'm sure other's) liking. But I want you guys to know that we are still working over here on the admin MOD [edit: accidentally gave myself a little promotion there) side.

As a point of reference, the setting which I think would most easily be implementable would simply be to have the following settings:Map view: exactly as is nowGame Log: Either no log, or just start/end of turns. I know that it would be ideal to be able to see who attacked what of your own terits in the log, but other than that, anything in the log is going to give away information about players that doesn't fit the (my) concept of fog of war.Elimination Log: Not neededInformation Box: either removed or all question marks. If still in place, it should still cross out eliminated players, but so should the turn indicators.I think that would (although I don't know) be reasonably easy to code.

I just would like to comment that if ever this pushes through, whenever someone makes a C&A report under this setting, he definitely has to wait until the game is over and when the game logs are revealed.

A very good one! When you think of it the current system of fog of war makes little sense. It's fun and I want to keep it the way it is, but it's not realistic at all! The new one could be called "Blind Warfare" or something along those roads.

AoG for President of the World!!I promise he will put George W. Bush to shame!

Full Fog of War: The idea is rooted the many "Fog of War" games I have played where players use the Game Log to locate and identify the players in the game. between the player Regions stat and the Game Log "Fog of War" games are not very foggy. The idea is to hide the Regions Stat and game log from all players who are not on your team. if it is not possible to selectively hide game log entries then hide the whole log all the time for fog games.

Specific Details:Hide all identifiable characteristics of the game which assist in enemy players figuring out what it going on outside the natural adjacent territory sight of the map. The features specifically are the game log in it's entirety. If the Game log can be selective in what it shows to each player, then it should only show turn start and end for each player who is not on your team. No territory numbers, No fighting, no troop placement, no spoils gained, no bonus information for territories held (might as well just say which one since most maps only have 1 or 2 locations for each bonus amount, if green gets a bonus of 2&3 you can bet they have X territory since there is only one 2 bonus and there is two 3 bonuses, but one next to the 2 bonus... ect.)

How this will benefit the site?Full Fog of War will make a more challenging and fun environment for fog games. It will provide an interesting game play situation where players can hide and bluff since opponents will not know if they hold a region or just border it. A player could seem big when they are very small and successful bluff. Currently it is impossible to bluff since the game log will show your real situation. With Full Fog of War the opponents will have to depend on their ability to access the situation without game stats to assist them.

jbadbear wrote:Full Fog of War: The idea is rooted the many "Fog of War" games I have played where players use the Game Log to locate and identify the players in the game. between the player Regions stat and the Game Log "Fog of War" games are not very foggy. The idea is to hide the Regions Stat and game log from all players who are not on your team. if it is not possible to selectively hide game log entries then hide the whole log all the time for fog games.

Specific Details:Hide all identifiable characteristics of the game which assist in enemy players figuring out what it going on outside the natural adjacent territory sight of the map. The features specifically are the game log in it's entirety. If the Game log can be selective in what it shows to each player, then it should only show turn start and end for each player who is not on your team. No territory numbers, No fighting, no troop placement, no spoils gained, no bonus information for territories held (might as well just say which one since most maps only have 1 or 2 locations for each bonus amount, if green gets a bonus of 2&3 you can bet they have X territory since there is only one 2 bonus and there is two 3 bonuses, but one next to the 2 bonus... ect.)

How this will benefit the site?Full Fog of War will make a more challenging and fun environment for fog games. It will provide an interesting game play situation where players can hide and bluff since opponents will not know if they hold a region or just border it. A player could seem big when they are very small and successful bluff. Currently it is impossible to bluff since the game log will show your real situation. With Full Fog of War the opponents will have to depend on their ability to access the situation without game stats to assist them.

I went ahead and MERGED this with the stickied topic that was the exact same idea.

Can anyone explain me how any type of super-fog (particularly removal of log) would increase strategy element in this game?All I can see is just an incredibly increased luck factor of favourable drop/dices/neighbours and people would just blindly play their games.

How would you plan your moves if you would have basically zero information of what other players are doing?As soon as someone gains a substantial bonus, it would be a game over, because how other players will find out about that before it's too late?

Herbas wrote:Can anyone explain me how any type of super-fog (particularly removal of log) would increase strategy element in this game?All I can see is just an incredibly increased luck factor of favourable drop/dices/neighbours and people would just blindly play their games.

How would you plan your moves if you would have basically zero information of what other players are doing?As soon as someone gains a substantial bonus, it would be a game over, because how other players will find out about that before it's too late?

perfectly agreed !!!well worded it mate.

one explanation, that might be valid or invalid for your way of understanding, that is, some ppl do like blind pillow fight...i agree with you fully, but saying again, some ppl do like it rolling without any worry over strategy...

Herbas wrote:Can anyone explain me how any type of super-fog (particularly removal of log) would increase strategy element in this game?All I can see is just an incredibly increased luck factor of favourable drop/dices/neighbours and people would just blindly play their games.

How would you plan your moves if you would have basically zero information of what other players are doing?As soon as someone gains a substantial bonus, it would be a game over, because how other players will find out about that before it's too late?

perfectly agreed !!!well worded it mate.

one explanation, that might be valid or invalid for your way of understanding, that is, some ppl do like blind pillow fight...i agree with you fully, but saying again, some ppl do like it rolling without any worry over strategy...

well, you would still have your border information, tert count, and game chat.

i think this suggestion was founded on the idea of someone disliking when a group of players team up on the clear leader. said leader just wants to bulldoze everyone once bonus gets significant. but like ya'll say, seems kind of boring to me.

on the other hand, i prefer playing with diplomacy. which i see zero log information creating a whole new perspective on such game types. even giving the little man a bit of clout when it comes to bluffing and what not. i'd play it.